In a twitter message the US indicated that “Earlier this year as a result of regular internal oversight USAID became aware of the possible misuse of US assistance funding in Zimbabwe.

“They went further to say US EMBASSYHarare@use “when USAID learned of the situation an investigation was immediately launched and several issues were brought to light. Those issues have been dealt with accordingly.”

In another Twitter message the US said “We remain committed to assisting the people of Zimbabwe and invest millions of dollars each year to support a wide range of programs to benefit them. Attempts to divert US funds from their intended use is unacceptable under any circumstances” #USZIM

MDC Alliance has promised the electorate that Lorries of money will be coming from America. Chamisa told the nation that he has been promised 15 billion dollars by Trump. The salivating of the greedy Alliance with their eyes fixed in the national pot has been exposed by the Americans. If they have failed to account for peanuts they get from the Americans what will happen to our national pot if by stroke of bad luck the opposition finds themselves in power.

Yet again our promising opposition have fallen short of expected professional and moral standards. Part of the problem is the concept of “allowances” and the confusion between allowances and expenses. Strictly speaking an “allowance” is an amount which may be claimed within a certain category. Unfortunately, the common perception is that the allowance is part of the remuneration package and therefore has to be claimed, even if the criterion for the allowance is not met.

There is a “use it or lose it” mentality. Why are we not surprised that this continues to happen? America has seen it for us and has stopped sponsoring the money eaters who are waiting to jump in the government.

If one listens to the way the opposition lambasts the government for financial abuse, only to realise that they are pointing at a lizard while they are sitting on a snake. Voting for the opposition is a time bomb which can only be diffused by you and exploded by you. America has raised the alarm and warned you that those gluttons are not saviours at all but indeed gladiators waiting to destroy our economy which ED was trying to resuscitate.

This economy was destroyed by the sanctions called for by the same opposition and now they wanted to make sure it’s completely finished. It will be a sad day for Zimbabwe if those rejected by the Americans and kept far away from the pocket are to be put close to the public fund.

The American investigations identified many examples of bogus invoices used to support the claims for allowances. They are still investigating instances of potential expenses manipulation, instances of taking care of the fictitious victims of violence and a lot more.

The problem with the opposition is even murkier as could be seen in the rules for claiming which can be interpreted in several ways and let’s not forget that the Americans have been deeply depressed and flabbergasted by the stealing zeal in the opposition.

Abuse of donor resources for -election is a common practice by the opposition. This is a telling point, a revelation of things to come. It causes damage to democracy by creating an uneven playing field which improves the-election chances of well-paid and foreign funded opposition.

In addition, putting assets at the opposition party’s disposal in its drive for-election negatively influences the quality of government should they win, since the diversion of resources incurs financial costs for the institutions involved and may reduce the quantity or quality of services provided to the public.

As they will be paying back for the handouts given. Misuse of public resources to win an election yields a political benefit (re-election) rather than an individual personal benefit (e.g., enrichment from a bribe). This justifies extending the concept of corruption beyond “abuse of entrusted power for private gain” to include political gain as well. This is a way of rigging which many people never look at.

International donors and other specialists on public sector reform consider the issue too politically sensitive to include on their development agendas, because reforms that challenge the power of opposition politicians may have negative diplomatic and commercial implications for donor countries if the opposition wins. . . Most efforts to address abuse of donor resources have considered only the demand side of the problem and always viewed as victimisation of the opposition.

While the development community regularly implements programmes that address several issues relevant to the supply side, it has ignored the potential of using such programmes to tackle political abuse by the opposition.

This action by America is the first of its kind which exposes the opposition abuse of funds. It clearly tells us that the opposition cannot be trusted with public purse. This is an important step toward identifying reform priorities, since certain types of abuses may have relatively modest financial implications but serious, long-lasting impacts on the fairness of democratic representation.

For example, the private media often highlight the unauthorized use of official vehicles or the requirement that civil servants attend campaign rallies for ruling-party candidates. However blatant such common forms of abuse may be, the financial damage to public administration is relatively small, especially when compared to the financial impact of using donor funds meant for a community to pay a salary for Chamisa and pay maintenance for Tsvangirai’s fifty children and Biti’s dark corners. Nevertheless, even such low-level abuses may cause significant damage to the prospects for fair electoral competition.

Donors should reconsider their hands-off stance with respect to these problems. For example, abuse of community resources could be considered routinely as a risk factor in donors’ assessments of their activities, and mechanisms included in memoranda of understanding to minimize the possibility of abuse.

Serious abuses should prompt donors to reconsider the eligibility of the perpetrators to continue as working partners. Other options include building up local, independent research organizations that carry out advocacy related to abuse of donor resources, monitoring distribution of the donor funds. “Milking the system”: Fighting the abuse of resources for election, and using donors’ influence to keep this sensitive issue on national and local political agendas. A framework for fighting the abuse of public resources for political gain should therefore be put in place.

The revelations and suspension of funding the NGO’S who have always been the sidekicks of the opposition has exposed the ulterior motives of the opposition, should they make it to the government. No wonder why Biti is praying for a GNU. It is not in the interest of the nation but in the interest of their pockets.

Those who went around accusing Zanu PF of corruption are the ones censured by their handlers for gross fraud and abuse of donor funds. The lesson we have learnt from this is that never trust MDC, they have their mind in the pocket. ED has broken ranks with the old ZANU WAY. He has shown that Zimbabwe can be a jewel again. For a greater financial change Vote ED. 30th July ED must have your vote if you are in doubt ask USAID.

Comments

comments